Photo by Luke Mahoney

Tearing down history: The planned demolition of A-bomb surviving buildings and how Hiroshima locals feel about it

On August 6th, 1945, Japan became the only country to suffer an attack by a nuclear weapon. Nearly 75 years later, a debate is raging about the future of buildings that survived the blast.

Located 2.7 kilometers from the bombing’s hypocenter, the former Hiroshima Army Clothing Depot consists of several large brick-exterior buildings. Opened in 1913, the buildings were used to store and produce military uniforms. Following WWII, they were briefly used as a dormitory. Although made from reinforced concrete, the buildings are now dilapidated and at risk of collapsing during an earthquake [1].

In a December announcement, Hiroshima city officials announced their decision to demolish two of the three buildings and renovate the third [2]. Residents, who have likened the buildings to “voiceless survivors of the atom bomb,” bristled over the historical and sentimental implications of the decision [3]. Their reasons are not hard to understand.

The End of WWII

It’s impossible to overstate the effects of the 1945 USA attack had on the residents of Hiroshima. Numerous generations have a strong connection to the loss their townspeople endured, and the ramifications of the bombing routinely weave their way into everyday conversation. Their damage is most apparent every year on August 6th, when residents and visitors gather at the city center for a lantern ceremony and to pay respect to victims [4].

Modern-day Hiroshima is a bustling manufacturing hub with a population of about 1.1 million. Nevertheless, lively sporting events and vibrant shopping centers betray the underlying gravity of its history. Due to its past, the city serves as a de facto peace ambassador staunchly opposed to nuclear proliferation [5].

Every year, Hiroshima attracts heads-of-states and other high-level diplomats. As recent as November 2019, Pope Francis made a historic visit, the first such occasion by a sitting Pope since 1981 [6]. Meeting with Hiroshima’s hibakusha, atomic blast survivors, he denounced the use and possession of nuclear arms as immoral [7].

Anyone familiar with the city understands the solemnity of such occasions. Indeed, pictures of the Pope's recent trip are striking. At dusk, the spiritual leader can be seen hanging his head in silence in front of the Memorial Cenotaph, darkness cast in the background. In others, the Roman Pontiff can be seen greeting and speaking with elderly survivors of the attack, and finally condemning the use of nuclear weapons [8].

In a world where millions of children and families live in inhumane conditions, the money that is squandered and the fortunes made through the manufacture, upgrading, maintenance and sale of ever more destructive weapons are an affront crying out to heaven.

Pope Francis

We were recently in Hiroshima. We took the opportunity to ask residents how they felt about the planned demolition of two of the few remaining structures that survived the infamous attack.

Photo by Luke Mahoney

A Monumental Decision

Understandably, the decision to demolish the Hiroshima Army Clothing Depot has met with considerable resistance. Since the announcement, over 15,000 residents have signed a petition calling for the preservation of the buildings. Despite a 2017 inspection which found the structures unfit to withstand an earthquake, many are prepared to pay the considerable cost to renovate the monuments [9].

Photo by Luke Mahoney

Most of the residents we interviewed support this opinion. Here is what they had to say:

I think [demolishing the buildings is] a horrible idea. My grandfather died in the nuclear bomb attack, and I never met him because of this. We shouldn't wipe that from our memory.

Megumi

I think we should keep the buildings. Even if they’re dangerous, we should restore and preserve them.

Shouko

We should save these buildings. They are made from brick, which is very beautiful and uncommon in Japan. We should turn them into an exhibit or a museum.

Akiko Y.

We should keep them. There are only a few buildings like that that survived WWII.

Taka

I understand why some want to get rid of the buildings, and some want to keep them. It’s difficult, but I’d keep them if it were up to me.

Akiko M.

Photo by Luke Mahoney

The Cost to Taxpayers

Not everyone, however, agrees. As mentioned, the structures are noticeably deprecated. Officials legitimately fear they may collapse during a significant enough earthquake, which regularly occurs in Hiroshima and throughout Japan.

The estimated cost of refurbishing all three structures is a stunning 8.4 billion yen ($77 million). Renovating only one, as the government proposes, is a much more acceptable cost, somewhere between 1.4 and 3.1 billion yen ($13 to 28 million) [10].

Some residents respect this compromise:

One building is enough. They are expensive, and the city is changing, so I don't think we need all three. There are also lots of photos in Google Archives, so we can still remember things.

Kanna

Those buildings are expensive to maintain. If people really want them, we can keep one. But if it were up to me, we could tear them down.

Hisako

I don’t think we should pay to keep them. We can’t keep everything, and we already have several monuments to remind us of what happened.

Jiro

Photo by Luke Mahoney

Repurposing History

Perhaps a compromise lies in repurposing the historic structures into a museum. Japanese people are respectful of history, and the country is currently experiencing a tourism boom [11]. Revenue from admission fees, some say, could offset the notable price-tag of refurbishing the set of three buildings. As a plus, the historical significance of the buildings would also be preserved.

Some people have suggested renovating one; it'd be cheaper. In my opinion, they are a set. Although it's expensive, we should renovate all three. We could make money back by charging admission. That's my idea.

Tomomi

I think we should keep these buildings. History is very important for Japanese people. Other countries like Germany have made an effort to maintain the bright and dark parts of their history. We should do the same.

Keisuke

It’s a difficult situation. I’m not originally from Hiroshima, so I can’t say much. But they are very expensive for the city. The best way might be to turn them into museums. I’ve worked in that industry. It’s not such a difficult process.

Aya

Indeed, the issue is hotly contested. Online petitions are continuing, and will only gather more signatories. Whether the price of preserving history is too great to bear for the city of Hiroshima remains to be seen.

By - Luke Mahoney.

Tags:
/ / /